1. Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to an armored plating system. More specifically, the present invention relates to an improved armored plating system having laminated pieces and an embossed piece layered upon one another and where these pieces are contained in a series of array-forming tubes.
2. Background Information
The importance of armored plating seems obvious, yet cannot be overstated. One could reasonably argue that the importance of having reliable armored plating is more important than it ever has been. Such an argument could be made in view of several recent changes around the world. Currently, United States troops are placed under enemy fire on a daily basis on foreign soil. It is common to see daily casualty reports streaming in from the likes of Iraq and Afghanistan. In some instances, these casualties are made worse by troops not wearing protective armor; or, because the armor the troops were wearing could not stop the incoming bullet or shrapnel.
Although it may seem nonintuitive, an individual may choose not to wear known armored protection for several reasons. That is, the fiberglass composite used in known armor is friable. As such, particles associated with the composite often become embedded in one's skin or may be inhaled. Further, the long-range health implications associated with human interaction with these particles are not completely understood.
Known armored plating is inadequate for other reasons as well. It is well known to those skilled in the art that current armor cannot stop every kind of bullet that hits it, hence there are bullets known as “armor piercing bullets.” Typically, such bullets have a carbide head that efficiently deflects energy-absorbing armor components. Currently known armor cannot safely stop these types of bullets. On an ever-changing battlefield, the enemy is constantly upgrading the weapons it uses to defeat available protection. A back-and-forth struggle exists between updating the armor worn for protection and the weapons used to penetrate that protection.
In view of these problems, the United States Military is constantly assessing ways to improve soldier and vehicle protection. Armor requirements issued by the Military are updated often as the United States Military requires that armor worn by troops be better suited to stop faster and heavier bullets. Armor considered acceptable for use with military and law enforcement personnel, in light of recent changes in minimum acceptable standards, will soon be considered insufficient. In November 2004, changes were made to the desired standards of armored plating used by the Military. These changes were brought about, at least in part, by newly developed ammunition and explosives used by enemies of the United States of America. For example, the most desirable armor is that which can safely stop both individual bullets and shrapnel fragments. Armor should be able to protect against multiple impacts from 0.30 caliber and 0.50 caliber Fragment Simulating Projectiles (“FSP's”) and 7.62 mm cartridge.
Currently known armor worn by military and law enforcement personnel cannot stop an “armor piercing” bullet. Moreover, such known products have proven unsatisfactory in safely stopping the very type of object produced by explosive devices currently used by insurgents in Iraq.
It is important to note that the strength of known armored plating relies on a general fiberglass composite for adequate protection. In a sense, such a composite acts like a sponge. As the bullet traverses the fiberglass composite, it is wedged within the composite until friction sufficiently robs the bullet of mechanical energy. However, those wishing to penetrate such armor may exploit this safely mechanism. For example, it is well known to those skilled in the art that attempts have been made, with varying degrees of success, to coat bullets with TEFLON. The coating on these bullets is particularly effective in sufficiently reducing friction between the bullet and fiberglass composite so that each bullet passes through with minimal energy loss. As such, the very mechanism relied upon to provide safety might be exploited very easily.